test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

POOR reviews....

SystemSystem Member, NoReporting Posts: 178,019 Arc User
Well I just finished reading a very accurate and fair review of STO on GameSpy and I am wondering if that plus the multitude of similar feelings running through these forums will give Cryptic or
Atari the nudge to 'pull the plug' on this one after 90 days. I don't know but I haven't seen this much dissatisfaction with a game opening. I got this for 2 reasons, one is that I am a fond fan of the Trek mythos and loved SFC ten years ago. Secondly I have been happy with my long time association with another Cryptic creation, COH/COV. Yes I know they no longer have ownership but they did create it and I did enjoy it. I am hoping they come up with a way to have more meaningful interactions with NPC characters on non fighting missions....Maybe a 5 part story arc that gives you multiple answer choices that create a different outcome to the story in relation to your choices. Well I am hanging in there for awhile
(my one year paid subscrip notwithstanding) to see what will happen but I would hope that they figure out the tech issues of getting the constant server disconnects so that people just don't throw up their hands, swallow the loss of their money and move on...let's hope for the best...
Mercury out.:confused:
Post edited by Unknown User on
«13

Comments

  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    STO is a bad game and deserves the poor reviews. It is a pay-to-beta MMO.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Well I just finished reading a very accurate and fair review of STO on GameSpy and I am wondering if that plus the multitude of similar feelings running through these forums will give Cryptic or
    Atari the nudge to 'pull the plug' on this one after 90 days. I don't know but I haven't seen this much dissatisfaction with a game opening. I got this for 2 reasons, one is that I am a fond fan of the Trek mythos and loved SFC ten years ago. Secondly I have been happy with my long time association with another Cryptic creation, COH/COV. Yes I know they no longer have ownership but they did create it and I did enjoy it. I am hoping they come up with a way to have more meaningful interactions with NPC characters on non fighting missions....Maybe a 5 part story arc that gives you multiple answer choices that create a different outcome to the story in relation to your choices. Well I am hanging in there for awhile
    (my one year paid subscrip notwithstanding) to see what will happen but I would hope that they figure out the tech issues of getting the constant server disconnects so that people just don't throw up their hands, swallow the loss of their money and move on...let's hope for the best...
    Mercury out.:confused:

    Vanguard and Age of Failcom started far worse. But you have your point.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Reviews won't really determine the fate of a MMO. They can reflect on it, but consider Earth and Beyond, one of the better rated MMOs. It's really the 'maintance' phase that determines the life or death of a MMO imo. Despite being rather well recieved critically, it floundered due to lack of content development.

    It's well possible to occur here with STO as well, no mistake.

    Vanguard, the Matrix Online, and Final Fantasy XI (Xbox, this one actually really confuses me, almost 20 points difference on platform difference) have similar scores.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Well I just finished reading a very accurate and fair review of STO on GameSpy and I am wondering if that plus the multitude of similar feelings running through these forums will give Cryptic or
    Atari the nudge to 'pull the plug' on this one after 90 days. I don't know but I haven't seen this much dissatisfaction with a game opening. I got this for 2 reasons, one is that I am a fond fan of the Trek mythos and loved SFC ten years ago. Secondly I have been happy with my long time association with another Cryptic creation, COH/COV. Yes I know they no longer have ownership but they did create it and I did enjoy it. I am hoping they come up with a way to have more meaningful interactions with NPC characters on non fighting missions....Maybe a 5 part story arc that gives you multiple answer choices that create a different outcome to the story in relation to your choices. Well I am hanging in there for awhile
    (my one year paid subscrip notwithstanding) to see what will happen but I would hope that they figure out the tech issues of getting the constant server disconnects so that people just don't throw up their hands, swallow the loss of their money and move on...let's hope for the best...
    Mercury out.:confused:

    Hi , regarding server disconnects.
    I haven't had many since launch other than when the server collapses. Maybe i'm just lucky.
    I don't think there is any chance this will be "pulled" in 90 days.
    Cryptic/Atari really need this to work to become a cash cow.
    I think the Average rating online for STO is 6.5/10.
    I agree with it (even though i enjoy the game).
    It appears STO has sold good in terms of boxes. I expect the number of non-renewals after the 30 free days to be slightly higher than the standard for MMO.
    I firmly believe there is enough Star Trek fans (who like the game or see the poential of it) to keep this game going for a long while yet. :)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    luke warm reviews and nerdrage and troll posts on the forums won't end the game. The only thing Atari cares about is the bottom line. If STO fails to deliver a net profit, then they will end it. However look at the horrible game that is star wars galaxies. THAT game is still alive. Vanguard is still alive. Warhammer and Age of Conan are still alive. If those titles can still survive, then STO can for sure.

    Personally I'm ignoring all these whine posts and am just enjoying the game.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Gotta love how people focus on the negative, yet there have been more positive reports than bad.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    tedgp123 wrote: »
    Gotta love how people focus on the negative, yet there have been more positive reports than bad.

    Do you know about the concept of metacritic and how it works?

    If you do: the metacritic score for STO right now is 63 out of 100. That is a little bit above average.

    If you dont, read about it.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    QLanatir wrote:
    Do you know about the concept of metacritic and how it works?

    If you do: the metacritic score for STO right now is 63 out of 100. That is a little bit above average.

    If you dont, read about it.

    Think bulk of issue is alot of the positive stuff is coming as previews currently, due to various reasons. *shrug*

    Although, above average does imply more good than bad :). Just skews with folks because it should be better.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    QLanatir wrote:
    Do you know about the concept of metacritic and how it works?

    If you do: the metacritic score for STO right now is 63 out of 100. That is a little bit above average.

    If you dont, read about it.

    A bit above average... I don't follow. That means it's BETTER than average, even if only a bit. How is that a bad thing?

    Not trying to start anything, I'm just curious.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    I found the review very accurate. And the sad thing is its not taking a pop at the server disconects or the lack of a community feel because of the heavy use of instancing. Its not complaining about the pointlessness of PvP or the speed at which Admiral is reached or any number of other issues of the game.

    Its sadly the very basics of game play get boring over an extended period of time. The lack of a death penalty removes the need for any skill and hell the way ships can blow up and take you with them makes death almost a factor of the mission. My ship was blown up by the doomsday weapon exploding cause I was too close, it blowing up did almost as much damage as it shooting me, made the victory really good. But no death penalty it was more like a free heal. And the complexity of the ground and space combat quickly has all but the most backward of people bored with it. Theres no great tactics or interesting battles, you mash the space bar till you have taken out that enemy group and then move onto the next one. Or if your on ground its very little skill and more hoping your pets I mean BOFs keep the healing and the shields up.

    As the honeymoon period is running down I would be surprised if we seen any posative reviews. The game at first seems fun but quickly becomes repeative, overly simplistic and dull. With any luck Crytic will notice this and fix the game.

    Oh and incase this isn't constructive enough:

    Bring in the other 2 factions.
    Bring in Open PvP with the 2 other factions helping to make the battles even
    Give additional Abilities with 9 levels in a skil not just the option to train BoFs and have them do somthing
    Offer Open world combat planets like a more traditional MMO
    Scale down the size of some of the maps they look far too big
    Bring in a Death Penalty
    Offer Options during missions so Captains get to chose their response over just clicking continue
    Make it so different actions in the game offer different Accolades (sp) which then effect that captains story and abilities.
    Don't charge Customers for any of the above necessary fixes.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Deron93 wrote: »
    A bit above average... I don't follow. That means it's BETTER than average, even if only a bit. How is that a bad thing?

    It's not a bad thing.

    I think that is his point.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Deron93 wrote: »
    A bit above average... I don't follow. That means it's BETTER than average, even if only a bit. How is that a bad thing?

    Not trying to start anything, I'm just curious.

    Gamescore inflation mostly. It happens rather sporadically with some sources. There was a time when any new release game that had any sort of advertisement typically bottomed out at 90%. It's gotten better, but in no small part that's why it's important to read the review.

    Even still though, finding -anything- rated under 50% is difficult. And frankly, consider games like Nancy Drew Dossier and you see the problem.

    Not saying the game question isn't good, or even great, but it's an oddity to consider in that light.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Deron93 wrote: »
    A bit above average... I don't follow. That means it's BETTER than average, even if only a bit. How is that a bad thing?

    Not trying to start anything, I'm just curious.

    Well...it is put in perspective when you see that for example Vanguard, Saga of Heroes (a game with about 20 to 30 k subscribers has a score of 68. STO has 63. And everyone that knows how and what this game is/was knows what that means.

    Tabula Rasa closed servers for being not succesful after a year with a score of 78.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    I guess Atari/Cryptic where not willing to spend enough on journalistic 'perks' to get better reviews :)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    One thing I always think when I see people just, hatebash STO and want it to close is...do you guys not realize, were out of chances? Enterprise almost killed the franchise, the new movie has STARTED To bring a bit of life back, but it needs this game to be succesful if were going to get a proper series and franchise going again.

    The games not perfect, but Im willing to wait a little while for it to get better. Yeah, we have to pay the monthly fee which sucks, but I look at it this way. Atleast when the new content hits, Ill be an admiral already and ready to use it right away!
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    GameSpy's review was terrible - short and poorly wriiten. I agree with most of the others though. Regardless, I am still having a lot of fun.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    I guess Atari/Cryptic where not willing to spend enough on journalistic 'perks' to get better reviews :)

    Heh, amusing idea, but I try to think best of folks. I think it's more a case of too much hype and too little delivered. Needs more content, and to have more interesting stuff in the Miranda tier and the T2. And the lower levels do suffer in my opinion, and that's where the bulk of the reviewers are going to be looking.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    One thing I always think when I see people just, hatebash STO and want it to close is...do you guys not realize, were out of chances? Enterprise almost killed the franchise, the new movie has STARTED To bring a bit of life back, but it needs this game to be succesful if were going to get a proper series and franchise going again.

    The games not perfect, but Im willing to wait a little while for it to get better. Yeah, we have to pay the monthly fee which sucks, but I look at it this way. Atleast when the new content hits, Ill be an admiral already and ready to use it right away!

    The game won't effect the franchise... Unless STO becomes WOW anyway, but that's a pipedream. Please certainly don't 'force yourself' through a game for the sake of the franchise, you'll just get bitter towards the game and the franchise that way.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    reiella wrote: »
    The game won't effect the franchise... Unless STO becomes WOW anyway, but that's a pipedream. Please certainly don't 'force yourself' through a game for the sake of the franchise, you'll just get bitter towards the game and the franchise that way.

    Im already bitter, I LIKED enterprise :P
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Thanks to those that replied to me, with the explanation.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Im already bitter, I LIKED enterprise :P

    Ouch :). Well there ya go. Fair enough really, but in general, I try to dissuade folks from slaughing through gameplay that's not enjoyable because it'll get better later. That led to me to burnout and to heavily resent fantasy MMOs for a very long time and just wasn't good all around. :)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Im already bitter, I LIKED enterprise :P

    You serious??
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Well I for one give this game a glowing review!
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Im already bitter, I LIKED enterprise :P

    I feel your pain... I liked Voyager. :eek:
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Well I just finished reading a very accurate and fair review of STO on GameSpy and I am wondering if that plus the multitude of similar feelings running through these forums will give Cryptic or
    Atari the nudge to 'pull the plug' on this one after 90 days. I don't know but I haven't seen this much dissatisfaction with a game opening. I got this for 2 reasons, one is that I am a fond fan of the Trek mythos and loved SFC ten years ago. Secondly I have been happy with my long time association with another Cryptic creation, COH/COV. Yes I know they no longer have ownership but they did create it and I did enjoy it. I am hoping they come up with a way to have more meaningful interactions with NPC characters on non fighting missions....Maybe a 5 part story arc that gives you multiple answer choices that create a different outcome to the story in relation to your choices. Well I am hanging in there for awhile
    (my one year paid subscrip notwithstanding) to see what will happen but I would hope that they figure out the tech issues of getting the constant server disconnects so that people just don't throw up their hands, swallow the loss of their money and move on...let's hope for the best...
    Mercury out.:confused:

    [edit] There are negative reviews because of EXPECTATIONS!! Everybody had their own idea of what this game should be. Yes there are things which need tweaking but the overall game is fun to play! And 90 days and pull the plug? [edit]

    This post has been edited to remove content which violates the Cryptic Studios Forum Usage Guidelines ~Seadgir
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    There have also been quite a few positive reviews. Plus, from what I've read, even the negative ones comment on the potential of the game to overcome many of the initial flaws. There are very few criticisms of the game that cannot be met with patches, more diplomacy content, revamped social sectors, and improved UI.

    Some of the most common criticisms have even been directly answered by Cryptic with promises of things they are working on.

    STO gives me hope, because unlike most Trek games of the last 10 years, the devs didn't give up on it once it went out the door. It may be unfinished, but at least it's a work in progress.

    Give it some time before you cast a final judgment.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    QLanatir wrote:
    Vanguard and Age of Failcom started far worse.


    Who???



    10 char
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Kirkfat wrote: »
    There have also been quite a few positive reviews. Plus, from what I've read, even the negative ones comment on the potential of the game to overcome many of the initial flaws. There are very few criticisms of the game that cannot be met with patches, more diplomacy content, revamped social sectors, and improved UI.

    Some of the most common criticisms have even been directly answered by Cryptic with promises of things they are working on.

    STO gives me hope, because unlike most Trek games of the last 10 years, the devs didn't give up on it once it went out the door. It may be unfinished, but at least it's a work in progress.

    Give it some time before you cast a final judgment.


    trudat. but they had better keep their word. If the current situation says anything, it is proof that the gaming community is an unforgiving beast.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Deron93 wrote: »
    A bit above average... I don't follow. That means it's BETTER than average, even if only a bit. How is that a bad thing?

    Not trying to start anything, I'm just curious.

    well, would the a bit above average means that STO is one of the best of the worst games or one of the worst of the best games ? :p
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Kirkfat wrote: »
    There have also been quite a few positive reviews. Plus, from what I've read, even the negative ones comment on the potential of the game to overcome many of the initial flaws. There are very few criticisms of the game that cannot be met with patches, more diplomacy content, revamped social sectors, and improved UI.

    Some of the most common criticisms have even been directly answered by Cryptic with promises of things they are working on.

    STO gives me hope, because unlike most Trek games of the last 10 years, the devs didn't give up on it once it went out the door. It may be unfinished, but at least it's a work in progress.

    Give it some time before you cast a final judgment.

    Potential is irrelevant.

    Decent reviewers review THE ACTUAL GAME as it stands, not some fantasy future the game may or may not realise.

    I remember people spouting that most misunderstood of all phrases "potential" for many other mmorpg's which have failed or are failing. Even the very best NEVER lived up to their potential, not even close. Why? Because it's a damn computer programme and will never be perfect and never meet the expectations mmo gamers seem to have but have never experienced.
Sign In or Register to comment.